The first thought my exhausted brain (it was a long day) put forward was that the 10C looks like a singleton so I expected East to rise with the king. Now ducking runs into the QC return (NOT the four as first tried) forcing the ace and defeating the contract with the slow club winner.
It looks like in this line, South is very glad the KD is on-side as he has to rise with the ace on the first trick and eventually hope the finesse lands. Or am I missing something?
Best,
Jeff
Jeff SerandosOctober 18th, 2023 at 4:28 am
that should say “as I first tried”, not “as first tried”. Where’s that edit button?
Jeff
Iain ClimieOctober 18th, 2023 at 8:52 am
Hi Bobby,
Double dummy 5H X can go 3 off – C to the Ace at T1 (!) DQ covered, D to the J, underlead the spades to the King and cash D10. Back on planet real Two off is plausible. Whatever happened to “The 5 level belongs to the opponents” or is there a case where the law of total tricks makes more sense – EW have 11 trumps, NS have 10.
HI Jeff,.
Interesting if clubs are 3-2 with EW playing 5 card majors. West has C10x and DKxx, with East having a diamond more and CKQJ. Declarer’s line today still works but taking T1 doesn’t.
Regards,
Iain
Robert LiptonOctober 18th, 2023 at 11:57 am
Iain, my takeaway after reading this column for years is that North-South overbid, and then have to find the 8% line of play to make the hand; if they don’t, they are told off for misplaying. There’s a certain wisdom to this; if there is a way to make the hand, you’ve got to take it. My general takeaway, however, is that people bid too much. As an old rubber-bridge hack, I’m quite happy to have the opponents overbid, allow me to rack up 300 points a hand with my solid partner, until we win the rubber. Even at a tenth of a cent a point, that adds up!
Yet here’s a case where I agree with the apparent overbidding. First off, LOTT is an approximation at the best of times, and when there’s a void in the opponents’ suit and a fifth trump, LOTT becomes even worse. Nonetheless it’s not too far off here. Best play by defense (Spade to the Ace, diamond shift) holds EW to 9 tricks. Meanwhile, as demonstrated, South can make 12 tricks….. although given a doubled contract, I’m content to throw away the overtrick in the name of safety and a lower downside, even at Matchpoints.
Bob Lipton
bobbywolffOctober 18th, 2023 at 1:07 pm
Hi Jeff, Iain, & Bob,
An exciting hand, well covered by you three, and an olive leaf for overbidding.
All aggressive players, tournament or money bridge, will be quite happy with both the rhetoric espoused and, of course, the result.
Iain ClimieOctober 18th, 2023 at 3:28 pm
Hi Bob,
An interesting point at rubber bridge of course is that sacrificing 300 pts against a vulnerable game means you’re paying to continue a rubber the opponents are 3-1 on to win! Totally different to pairs and teams of course although even then I suspect plenty of phantom sacrifices occur. I’m trying to remember who argued in general against sacrifices at IMPS and rubber (especially) given the possibility that declarer might misplay the hand or the contract might be cold off or even some defensive coup might be possible.
Subscribe to our feed
Bridge-related
Hi Bobby,
The first thought my exhausted brain (it was a long day) put forward was that the 10C looks like a singleton so I expected East to rise with the king. Now ducking runs into the QC return (NOT the four as first tried) forcing the ace and defeating the contract with the slow club winner.
It looks like in this line, South is very glad the KD is on-side as he has to rise with the ace on the first trick and eventually hope the finesse lands. Or am I missing something?
Best,
Jeff
that should say “as I first tried”, not “as first tried”. Where’s that edit button?
Jeff
Hi Bobby,
Double dummy 5H X can go 3 off – C to the Ace at T1 (!) DQ covered, D to the J, underlead the spades to the King and cash D10. Back on planet real Two off is plausible. Whatever happened to “The 5 level belongs to the opponents” or is there a case where the law of total tricks makes more sense – EW have 11 trumps, NS have 10.
HI Jeff,.
Interesting if clubs are 3-2 with EW playing 5 card majors. West has C10x and DKxx, with East having a diamond more and CKQJ. Declarer’s line today still works but taking T1 doesn’t.
Regards,
Iain
Iain, my takeaway after reading this column for years is that North-South overbid, and then have to find the 8% line of play to make the hand; if they don’t, they are told off for misplaying. There’s a certain wisdom to this; if there is a way to make the hand, you’ve got to take it. My general takeaway, however, is that people bid too much. As an old rubber-bridge hack, I’m quite happy to have the opponents overbid, allow me to rack up 300 points a hand with my solid partner, until we win the rubber. Even at a tenth of a cent a point, that adds up!
Yet here’s a case where I agree with the apparent overbidding. First off, LOTT is an approximation at the best of times, and when there’s a void in the opponents’ suit and a fifth trump, LOTT becomes even worse. Nonetheless it’s not too far off here. Best play by defense (Spade to the Ace, diamond shift) holds EW to 9 tricks. Meanwhile, as demonstrated, South can make 12 tricks….. although given a doubled contract, I’m content to throw away the overtrick in the name of safety and a lower downside, even at Matchpoints.
Bob Lipton
Hi Jeff, Iain, & Bob,
An exciting hand, well covered by you three, and an olive leaf for overbidding.
All aggressive players, tournament or money bridge, will be quite happy with both the rhetoric espoused and, of course, the result.
Hi Bob,
An interesting point at rubber bridge of course is that sacrificing 300 pts against a vulnerable game means you’re paying to continue a rubber the opponents are 3-1 on to win! Totally different to pairs and teams of course although even then I suspect plenty of phantom sacrifices occur. I’m trying to remember who argued in general against sacrifices at IMPS and rubber (especially) given the possibility that declarer might misplay the hand or the contract might be cold off or even some defensive coup might be possible.
Regards,
Iain